A little bird tells me that Songbird Survival is looking for a Chief Executive to work a few days a week running the charity.
The little bird seemed to have this on very reliable authority so I attempted to ask Songbird Survival through their website for details and an application form as I may have just the qualifications and experience that they need. Their email address ([email protected]) on the website doesn’t seem to work so I filled in the form asking for more details nearly two weeks ago but they haven’t replied to my enquiry. That doesn’t create a very good impression does it? How many other interested parties are being ignored by this charity?
Maybe you can have more luck than I did.
I bet HM the Queen got a faster response when she donated money to this outfit several years ago. Maybe she’ll be on the interview panel?
Have you voted in my poll on what the RSPB might choose for its new name?
Songbird Survival gets a few mentions in Chapter 11 of Fighting for Birds.
Postscript:
An email received from Songbird Survival on Tuesday 4 September:
We note your Blog of 3rd September and are disappointed that you did not try telephoning us to let us know that your email did not reach us.
We have not had any other reports that our email address was not working but we have today had some problems with our website contact form which we are trying to rectify as soon as possible.
I attach the Director job advertisement as seen in the Telegraph for your information.
As with all other enquiries about the position which we have received here in the office we direct you to contact Peter Fenton at Hanover Fox International.
Email address: [email protected] or telephone 0207 917 9456 or 01454 617555.
Thank you for your interest in SongBird Survival.
[registration_form]
Songbird survival is a grubby unprofessional little outfit so I’m not surprised you got little response. A few years ago they used some of my photos without permission (or crediting the photographer) on their website, a real cut and paste job that offended me highly. Thankfully they removed them when the error of their way was pointed out as I for one would have rather given them to the Countryside Alliance to use than SS (or are they the same?). Give them some credit – they got the BTO to do a useful bit of science for them!
On the plus side, I imagine it will be very well remunerated… After all, with so many members of our country’s glorious nobility represented on Songbird Survival’s board of directors – not least Viscount Coke, a man presumably mightily relieved in the not-too-distant past that there was no law regarding vicarious liability for raptor persecution – the position should be well-bankrolled and generously paid.
It’s a jolly interesting website. The thing, for me, that sets it apart from the competition is that there is no real opportunity to make any comment – there is a ‘comment’ section which seems to have one comment from 2006 about net curtains ! This contrasts rather starkly with eg the RSPB where anyone can comment on eg Martin Harper’s blog. I fear you’ve been filtered out, Mark – but there’s a consolation – at least someone at SSBS knows who you are !
Songbird survival are prime practitioners of ‘non-science’ – where you decide what you want to discover and then search the real science for out of context snippets that support your case – identical to many religious fundamentalist group’s treatment of the bible, koran etc. Also heavily practiced by climate change deniers.
This organisations sounds like a campaign run some time ago by the shooting fraternity; Save our Song Birds”. It is presumably a wolf dressed up as a lamb!
The moment I saw the words “large scale corvid removal” under Research, it confirmed it for me. I don’t think this sounds your cup of tea, Mark!
Rosemary – well spotted!
” … prime practitioners of ‘non-science’ … ”
As is true for just about everybody else with an agenda.
On my daily walk this morning I counted 10 Jackdaws, 8 Carrion Crow, 4 Magpies, 1 Buzzard and on the Songbird side 8 Robins, 10 House Sparrows, 4 Chaffinch, 2 Chiffchaff, 5 Wren, 8 Blackbirds.. All seems well to me on the Predator/prey balance. When I got out into some intensive farmland, I found nothing of anything, except a few Wood Pigeon. All uploaded to the BTO via their marvelous phone application. That’s citizen science for you.
So do we have less internsive more wildlife friendly farming that ends up taking up more room – or more intensive farming leaving more areas set aside for nature – an interesting conundrum.
As far as I am aware many woodland bird species are in decline even though woodland is increasing. Is this maybe due to the predationbs of the ever growing wild deer population?
ps and yes Mark I will read chapter seven as soon as I’ve finished curent novel I am reading!
Giles – good for you!
Giles – it may well be something to do with deer. If I recall correctly, woodland bird numbers have declined most in the southeast corner of the UK where deer pressure from muntjac in particular is highest. But some of these declining woodland species are declining right across Europe, and many are trans-Saharan migrants, so it is by no means clear cut.
Mark’s blog on this subject prompted me to visit the SS for the first time. Under ‘latest news’ we find…
“More importantly new studies have shown that several songbird species have been suffering badly as a result of rising levels of predation. Population declines of the tree sparrow (down 89 per cent), bullfinch (down 56 per cent) and house sparrow (down 74 per cent) have all been blamed on the resurgence of the sparrowhawk in both rural and urban areas. It doesn’t need a scientist to note the frequency of the word “sparrow” here. This sort of scientific evidence is being ignored and quietly buried.”
Leaving aside the question of whether a bird’s English name constitutes ‘scientific evidence’, elsewhere SS site reports a detailed analysis of long term data sets by the BTO, which they commissioned. This was published in a highly reputable scientific journal. The paper ends…
“In conclusion we still have much to learn about the mechanisms
underlying the declines of many species of wild birds. For
several of the prey species here associated with farmland habitat,
there is growing evidence that agricultural change has been
the major cause of decline (e.g. Vickery et al. 2004).A review of
the recent literature (Newton 2004) for example concluded that
27 of 30 farmland species were affected by a loss of nest sites, a
lack of winter or summer food or a combination of these factors.
Whilst there has been concern that increases in common
avian predators and grey squirrels may be depressing national
breeding population levels of some bird species, we found little
underlying evidence for a generalized impact of predators on
the majority of avian prey populations considered here.”
Fi Syn Siarad – welcome and thank you for your comment. Exactly! I’m guessing you wouldn’t be interested in the job at SS if it exists?
That paper did however suggest there may well be a connection between sparrow hawks and tree sparrows.
However, the BBS UK trend for Tree Sparrow shows a signficant increase (96%) since the mid-90s. I did notice that they seem to have more or less disappeared from SE England when a provisional distribution map for Tree Sparrow appeared on the BTO atlas website, but on the other hand they have undergone a significant range expansion in NE Scotland where I live. I’m sure this all has little to do with Sparrowhawks.
Tree sparrow numbers have crashed by about 97% a subsequent increase of 96% would of course mean they’d only crashed by 94% but that shows how misleading some statistics can be.
I wouldn’t blame that crash on sparrow hawks by the way. But I can see that when a population has dwindled to that extent then predation might well become more significant.
There is now a connection between Tree Sparrow and garden ponds so are they to encourage the government to pay the householder for more garden ponds!
I think if farmers get paid for conservation work then why not householders?
Can you imagine the mapping, cross-compliance, entitlement and shared ownership implications?
Well I had a good laugh at your cheek Mark.Disagree about farmland birds and lack of nesting sites as my guess would be that more hedges have been grown in the last 15 years and feel sure there was evidence somewhere so guess with your knowledge you would have that answer.
Dennis – I’m glad I made you chuckle.
At the risk of being labelled anti-farming I think there is a point to be made about nesting sites. I think what you are thinking of is that more hedges have been planted than lost in recent years (going back for more than a decade I guess). That is to be applauded. However, if you lost a mature hedge on a farm and planted a new one you wouldn’t exactly have broken even as far as nest sites are concerned so it is a bit more complicated than that.
The same point probably applies to the argument about the area of woodland increasing. Well intentioned people may be creating new woodland by planting broad-leafed trees but it does not mean that most of this woodland is anything approaching high quality woodland habitat. Consequently it does not automatically follow that song bird populations should be soaring as a result of increasing woodland area, as SS would have us believe.
Mark,I will definitely not label you anti-farmer as I know that you just do some things such as applying for SS job to be provocative and there is plenty of evidence for anyone who looks a bit deeper into your thoughts that you are pro-farmer although you obviously would like them to do more for farmland birds which I think lots of us would agree with.Sometimes of course the opposite of what you suggest in my opinion happens which is some mature hedges that were taken out were really tall and open only any use for Wood Pigeons and Magpies whereas a new young hedge regularly trimmed even if only trimmed every two years once established say about 7 years is nice and thick providing nest sites for lots of the smaller birds.
Dennis – true. Let’s agree.
An application form from SOS arrived in this mornings post which was strange as neither my staff or I had requested one. By mid-morning curiosty had got the better of me and I had my man put a call through to SOS.
It appears that applicants are invited to apply by invitation only. Apparently I’m just the man they are looking for….
Gideon – I am sure you are.
On woodland, there’s been a lot of work over the last few years and the leading causes of decline are, first, lack of management -woods getting darker, losing the shrub layer and so the habitat of a wide range of species including most sub-Saharan migrants. Second, deer grazing which ‘double whammies’ the poor old shrub layer. Plantlife’s excellent report ‘ Forestry Recommissioned’ points out that, after wartime fellings, 49% of broadleaved woodland was classed as coppice or srub in 1947. In 2002 it was just 3% (97% high forest). Just like with farmland, quality is critical and its ironic the woodland problem is exactly the opposite to agriculture – we need more management urgently.
Ah, I now see the job that you were suggesting I apply for Mark, but surely you are much better qualified than I? Then again I suspect that despite their well heeled sponsors, founders and patrons that they could not pay either of us enough to forget our principles.
Thoroughly enjoying Fighting for Birds but I have found a factual error that does not effect the argument it illustrated.
Paul – ha ha! I’m glad you are enjoying Fighting for Birds. Let me know the error you have found through a comment here but I may not post it!
Paul – thanks for the private comment. Not too bad then! best wishes
Mark, I am a little disappointed by your powers of research and the poor performance of your blog readers in helping you out with your prospective job application. Your ‘little bird’ must be a very late riser. The Songbird Survival job was advertised by the Daily Telegraph (who else) on the 9th August 2012 and it is pointless contacting the organisation direct when the recruitment is handled by a recruitment agency – in this case Hanover Fox International (very apposite) . You need to contact Peter Fenton on [email protected] or on 020 7917 9456. I trust this is of help. There will be no competition from me, I will not be applying (and they have not asked me).
Regards
Roger Buisson
Roger – that was going to be a follow up blog a little later this week actually but you got there first, well done. Here is the link for anyone, not you Roger, and after consideration, not me either, who may be interested http://www.hanoverfox.com/candidates/career/director-26/ although there aren’t many details there either.